It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
originally posted by: Admitted
a reply to: shooterbrody
No, the math I get. I know how many it takes to remove. That will never happen. Not as things are.
My thread is about witnesses and why no one wants to hear firsthand ones.
originally posted by: DBCowboy
originally posted by: Admitted
a reply to: DBCowboy
I would think you would want him to. But ok. If you don't care, you don't care.
Why would I care?
This is purely political.
It is an attack from democrats to oust a sitting president.
That's all this is.
originally posted by: Admitted
The blame is going to the House of Representatives (the people who represent U.S. citizens) for not subpoening these witnesses. Which could take months to years.
I think that's fair. The House should have done that. But here we are.
The courts are too slow and so, I get why this was done.
There is one problem I see here and it comes from the top.
I know most here love him, but love him or hate him, Trump is on the top. And he is sowing this division. America is a place of diverse opinions. Trump promotes one vision that does not align with the majority. We are in turmoil and IT IS his fault. He is the boss.
We are currently debating on whether to have witnesses at his impeachment trial.
Why on earth would we not have witnesses?
Why?
Because they have negative things to say about the President?
Do we have free speech? Rule of law? I guess not....not anymore.
originally posted by: carewemust
a reply to: burntheships
I still think it's illegal for the house to withhold the Atkinson transcript. Right now questions are being asked about the evidence. No questions can be asked about Atkinson's testimony because nobody has it but Adam shiff!
originally posted by: Admitted
originally posted by: DBCowboy
originally posted by: Admitted
a reply to: DBCowboy
I would think you would want him to. But ok. If you don't care, you don't care.
Why would I care?
This is purely political.
It is an attack from democrats to oust a sitting president.
That's all this is.
So, the withholding of aid for an investigation into a political rival is just bupkus? A farce? Completely false?
The many people to have attested to such are just bipartisan and want the President out?
That's what you believe?
originally posted by: Admitted
a reply to: pavil
They were. They should have brought these witnesses that they could. That the White House didn't block. They should have subpoeaned.
They put it off to the Senate and that was stupid.
But, the senate, should do what they didn't. We need first-hand accounts and they can provide that. That the house didn't do it right, doesn't mean they shouldn't.
I want the whole truth. I want firsthand witnesses. Bring them.
originally posted by: Admitted
a reply to: shooterbrody
That's the truth.
I would love to hear from some too.
The math does suck here. But mostly the partisanship.